Open public tendering and procurement processes should not be rocket science. This item in The Globe and Mail is the second worst news I have heard about Tims after their centralized baking turned tender cakes and pastries to glom:

In a letter sent a year ago to the TDL Group Corp, Tim Hortons' corporate owners, the Crown corporation asked that the stores become a retail partner for the launch of the unusual red-centred coin. "We are requesting your participation in this unique program," wrote Nancy Cogger, the Mint's vice-president of sales and marketing. "The idea is to drive traffic to your stores via the advertising and public-relations campaign."

Conservative MP Brian Pallister, however, says Tim Hortons obtained a "real benefit" from being the sole distributor of the coins and should have been asked to pay for that benefit. "What about all the other doughnut sales operations. I'll bet you Robin's Donuts is pretty displeased about this," Mr. Pallister said. "We've always got time for Tim Hortons, but this is a little ridiculous. The fact is that what Canadians got for what should have been for a lucrative tender is a big doughnut hole. Not only did Tim Horton's get the monopoly advantage of all the advertising that the Mint paid for, they didn't have to pay for the delivery or shipping costs, and that's a double double."

Given the Tories new policy of not uttering a word without review by central committee commissars, these gut-busting Timmmy's jokes are pure gold. But by directing Canadians to Tims to acquire the special quarters, there is no doubt that the public paid for private corporate advertising. It is too bad, from my review of the article, that The Globe focused more on parroting bad Tory jokes rather than asking substantive questions on the actual cost of the exclusive distribution and advertising deal. Neither the CBC or The Star seem to have the story let alone the cost yet.